ArticlePsychological medicine2025
Validity and reliability of the Mini International Neuropsychiatric Interview in Sub-Saharan Africa: a cross-country comparison study.
Article in Psychological medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Test-Retest Reliability of Standardized Diagnostic Interviews for Common Adult Psychiatric Disorders: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.JAMA network open · 2026Pooled it
- Cost-benefit analysis of interpersonal therapy and fluoxetine for treating depression and PTSD in primary care settings in Kenya.BMC psychiatry · 2026Trial
- Associations between PTSD and psychotic symptoms: A network analysis of patients with psychotic disorders in Uganda: Psychosis-PTSD network analysis.SSM. Mental health · 2026Article
- Epidemiology of violence and suicide risk in Senegal: A nationwide survey in 2023.PLOS global public health · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
30 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundDiagnostic tools, such as the Mini International Neuropsychiatric Interview (MINI) 7.0.2 and the Structured Clinical Interview for the DSM-5 (SCID), aim to increase the validity and reliability of diagnostic assessment. However, these tools were created in high-income countries (HICs) with limited investigation of the psychometrics of these tools when used in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Thus, there is a need to examine the psychometric properties of these measures in LMICs. The present investigation aimed to examine the use of the MINI in Ethiopia, Kenya, and Uganda.
methodsA multicountry comparison of the validity and reliability of the MINI was conducted in a study of 954 participants (
resultsResults revealed the MINI and SCID provided excellent diagnostic accuracy with area under the curve (AUC) values of .91 (
conclusionsSimilar patterns of results were observed at the country level with a few notable differences. Limitations and future directions are discussed.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.